Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp
You might find the following information useful....
Gilruth's developed the concept of stick force per G, control movement measurement, and pretty much wrote the standards of measurement for stability and control as used by the NACA.
Only two nations in the world had stability and control standards during World War II, the United States and Germany.
The NACA's measurement and classification system developed by Gilruth was not published until 1941 and was classified. It was not released to Allied Nations until 1943.
Even Gates, a very prominent RAE researcher who pioneered stability and control standards for the RAE was not privy to them during his 1942 "dash around America" tour of the United States research facilities. Gates was the one who defined Aerodynamic Center, stability margin, and maneuver points during his lifetime. He had a passion for stability and control and published some 130 papers before his death. Before him, the neutral point was termed the metacentric ratio.
Unfortunately, nobody at the RAE paid much attention to Gates and it was not until post war that the United Kingdom adopted any defined standards of what is acceptable and what is not in terms of stability and control. When they did, it was a mirror of Gilruths work at the NACA.
So, by what standard is the RAE refuting the NACA? The answer is really none. The RAE had no defined standards of stability and control except subjective opinion.
|
Still doesn't prove the Spitfire was a dangerous aircraft to fly; apart from that I'd like to see Crumpp provide some documentary evidence that Spitfires regularly broke up in flight during spin recovery.